Ten Good Questions to Ask a OneNess Pentecostal
James Pearce
2. Who is the Father of the Lord Jesus? And does the term "Jesus Christ the
Father", sound scriptural to you?
3. Is baptism essential before one can receive the gift of the Holy Ghost?
If Yes, please explain the situation with Peter Acts 10:44-47
4. What does it mean to be baptised "In the name of Jesus Christ"? Will a
person not baptised "in the name of Jesus Christ" go to heaven? Please
explain what it means to be saved by the Grace of God.
5. What is the name of God, and How do you know this is Gods name?
6. What is your definition of a "person". What is the trinitarian
definition of a "person"? How do they differ? Using your definition would
you consider the Father, Son & Holy Ghost "persons"? What about using the
trinitarian definition?
7. Please explain how the Word in John 1:1 was God. What is the name of the
Word?
8. Is Jesus Christ the Son of God? Is Jesus Christ, God the Father? Is
Jesus Christ the Holy Spirit? Does God manifest himself in the Son, The
Father, and The Holy Spirit, in three distinct and personally loving
ways/roles? Does this sound like a trinity to you?
9. If someone repents, gets baptised in the name of Jesus Christ according
to Peters instructions in Acts 2:38, but has not yet received the gift of
tongues, what does this mean? Is this person saved, and what should this
person do?
10. Did God die for you? If Yes, who died, the Son or the Father? Is the
Son God? If yes, How is the Son God? Is the Son eternal? Is the Father
eternal? Is the Holy Spirit eternal? Does this sound like a trinity to
you?
joybelle
I counted 32. Can you break this down into ten, then I can tackle it
better. Thanks..
Joy
"James Pearce" <ja...@nospamthanks.com> wrote in message
news:98218070...@helium.indigo.net.au...
James Pearce
"joybelle" <joyb...@NOSPAM.net> wrote in message
news:WgJi6.175$H3.1...@nntp2.onemain.com...
> I'd like to answer this post, but you said it would only be ten questions.
> I counted 32. Can you break this down into ten, then I can tackle it
> better. Thanks..
>
> Joy
hehe, If you answer 10 of those 32, Id be content ;0)
Regards,
James.
joybelle
quite lengthy.
Joy
"James Pearce" <ja...@nospamthanks.com> wrote in message
news:98225581...@helium.indigo.net.au...
James Pearce
"joybelle" <joyb...@NOSPAM.net> wrote in message
> I may get quite lengthy.
no doubt, especially when Mark chips in and starts "beating around the
bush".
I think Marks best defense of OneNess doctrine is in maintaining a constant
state of ignorance....By refusal to answer straight forward questions, posts
go on for ages... and in the end all the trinitarians give up out of
frustration, and then the circle starts again.
Marks philosophy is that nobody can refute the "truth", if they cant get at
it!
:0)
James.
Elijah
questions.
In the book of Isaiah it is written
For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall
be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The
mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.
If Isaiah called him the everlasting Father (and we know that the scripture
cannot be broken).
How Then is God his Father?
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
James Pearce
"Elijah" <eli...@home.com> wrote in message
news:3A8CDA22...@home.com...
> I will also ask you a question and if you answer me then shall i answer
you your
> questions.
Sure Ill answer your question...
> In the book of Isaiah it is written
> For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government
shall
> be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor,
The
> mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.
>
> If Isaiah called him the everlasting Father (and we know that the
scripture
> cannot be broken).
>
> How Then is God his Father?
Ahh, the old Isaiah 9:6 OneNess argument...
Firstly oneness people continually use another argument to bash
trinitarians, and that is they continually assert that the terms God the
Father, God the Son & God the Holy Spirit, are not in the old testiment.
They therefore maintain that God is a numerical One, and whatever the new
testament seems to say, it cannot mean that God is multipersonal, because it
supposedly goes against Old testament revelation about Gods OneNess.... But
it doesnt seem to bother them when the tables are turned, and they jump of
Isaiah 9:6, and say... "look, there is is!! Jesus is God the Father"....
This is really pure hypocrisy, the leaven of the Pharisees. OneNess like
all cults, dont mind being dishonest in defending their faith.
Now dealing with the actually verse, I can give you a text book answer...
Why? Because the verse is so frequently cited (infact its the only one they
have), by brainwashed OneNess people. The fact is, most probably havent
even studied the context, the chapter, or even the book, to see what this
revelation means. But you can be sure, they know verse ;0) Just like the
Mormons know their key proof verses, and the JW's when they knock on your
door.
The verse was not given to identify "the child", as the "person" or
"manifestation" of the Father in the new testiment. OneNess pentecostals
give meaning to this verse, that the author clearly had no point in
conveying. Its interesting to note that the term "everlasting Father" is
found nowhere else in the entire bible. The verse is establishing the
child's royality, his princehood, and even his diety, and his everlasting
reign. But nowhere is their an attempt to map the childs identity to one of
the three distinct persona's of God found in the new testament. So whatever
is meant by "everlasting father", it certainly cannot be used as a proof
text for explaining the distinctions between the Father, the Son & the Holy
Spirit. Usage of this verse, only proves some kind of desperate
"last-ditch" attempt at proving a doctrine that is unsupportable everywhere
else in the Bible.
Quoting Boyd on the issue of Isa 9:6:
"Seen in this light, it becomes clear, as virtually every reputable
commentator on Isaiah has seen, that Isaiah's use of "father" (av or ab) has
nothing to do with the formal title of "Father", which develops in the New
Testament out of Jesus' unique and revelatory relationship with God.
"Father" wasnt even a standard title of God in the Old Testament! In short,
this verse does not teach that Jesus is "the God and Father of our Lord
Jesus Christ"; it does not, in other words, teach that Jesus is his own
Father.
The title, as well as the other titles employed in Isa 9:6, denotes the
coming Messiah's character. This is what the Semitic concept of "name"
(shem) refers to when it says, "his name shall be called". There are two
ways in which the divine title used here of the coming messiah might be
interpreted, neither of which would make Jesus his own Father. The first
understands the expression to mean something like "everlasting Father"
(KJV), "father-forever" (Leupold), or "father for all time." In this
interpretation, the verse therefore "describes the nature of his rule" and
amounts to saying that the coming Messiah, in contrast to all other
presently reigning kings will not be "a despot". It describes the coming
Messiah's "paternal role", and is roughly equivalent to "good shepherd".
The unexpected reign of this king, in other words, will be a reign of
paternal love and care. The love and rule of this one to be like the "rule"
of a shepherd over his flock or a loving father over his children (John
10:11-14, 13:13, 1Pe 2:25)
The second interpretation translates the expression as "father of eternity,
or "father of all ages", or the like. According to this interpretation the
coming Messiah is described as eternal in nature, perhaps implying that he
is the Creator, Lord of time and history. Obviously neither of these
interpretations has anything to do with Jesus' supposed indentity as God the
Father.
------------------
I hope that answers your question.
Regards,
James.
Peter of Canada
His Father.
Regarding Fatherhood. I have a father. I also have a son and therefore am a
father as well. I can have a father and still be a father. The position is
not exclusive.
Regarding being called "mighty God," have you not read:
(Zechariah 12:8) On that day the LORD will put a shield about the
inhabitants of Jerusalem so that the feeblest among them on that day shall
be like David, and the house of David shall be like God, like the angel of
the LORD, at their head.
It wouldn't be the first time that men were called "god." As it is written:
(Psalms 82:6) I say, "You are gods, sons of the Most High, all of you;
Nevertheless, your question is not directed at man but to God, since you are
questioning Christ's truthfulness. You ask "How can God be His father?" but
I say "Because Jesus said that God was His Father."
(Matthew 10:32-33) So every one who acknowledges me before men, I also will
acknowledge before my Father who is in heaven; {33} but whoever denies me
before men, I also will deny before my Father who is in heaven.
And for a greater certainty, Christ makes it unequivocal that the Father is
a person other than Himself:
(Matthew 24:36) "But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels
of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father only."
You see, the Father knows something that the Son is not given access to. So
any theory that says that they are the same person is simply not biblical.
Period.
--
Peter
One Flock, One Rock
_/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/
He who sits in the heavens laughs; the LORD has them in derision.
(Psalms 2:4)
_/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/
"Elijah" <eli...@home.com> wrote
<pretense snipped>
Ron Hartley
What good do we do by constantly arguing over Oneness/Trinity? Does
anyone's theology change? Does anyone draw closer to God?
*sigh*
I will address a couple of the questions as I am at work and do not have
time to address them all.
[ Who is the Father of the Lord Jesus? And does the term "Jesus Christ the
Father", sound scriptural to you?]
According to the Bible the Holy Spirit (Ghost) overshadowed Mary and made
her Pregnant. So Technically the Holy Ghost (Spirit) is the Father of
Jesus.
[ 3. Is baptism essential before one can receive the gift of the Holy Ghost?
If Yes, please explain the situation with Peter Acts 10:44-47]
Nope! My son received the Holy Ghost before Being Baptized. I have baptize
people AFTER they have received the Holy Ghost.
[ 6. What is your definition of a "person". What is the trinitarian
definition of a "person"? How do they differ? Using your definition would
you consider the Father, Son & Holy Ghost "persons"? What about using the
trinitarian definition?]
Where is the term '' Person'' mentioned in the Bible?
PO6
Ron Hartley <hart...@qwest.net> wrote in message
news:qicj6.1001$Ol.1...@news.uswest.net...
> May I ask a multiple part question?
>
> What good do we do by constantly arguing over Oneness/Trinity? Does
> anyone's theology change? Does anyone draw closer to God?
>
No, in fact I get quite confused as you all go round in circles. Also, every
thread turns into a slanging match which I find quite sad. This is not quite
the edifying and educational newsgroup I had hoped it would be.
Nikki-noo sending blessings to you.
P.S. Does it really matter whether they are 3 in one or One in 3 ? Isn't it
the same Jesus that died for us, whose blood washes our sins away whiter
than snow?
Huldah
>> What good do we do by constantly arguing over Oneness/Trinity? Does
>> anyone's theology change? Does anyone draw closer to God?
<snip>
>P.S. Does it really matter whether they are 3 in one or One in 3 ? Isn't it
>the same Jesus that died for us, whose blood washes our sins away whiter
>than snow?
Yes, it does matter. 'Oneness' Pentecostalism denies the eternal
Deity of the Son, which is a fundamental Bible truth. They claim that
there *was* no 'Son of God' prior to the birth of a baby at
Bethelehem. But what saith the scriptures?:
"And now, O Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory
which I had with You before the world was." (John 17:5)
"'But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, Though you are little among the
thousands of Judah, Yet out of you shall come forth to Me The One to
be Ruler in Israel, Whose goings forth are from of old, From
everlasting.'" (Micah 5:2).
"Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever." (Hebrews
13:8).
"So, coming into the world, Christ says: You did not want sacrifice
and offering, but you prepared a body for me. In whole burnt
offerings even for sin, you took no delight. Then I said: Behold, I
come; in the scroll of a book it is written concerning me; to do, O
God, your will." (Hebrews 10:5-7 Lattimore).
"I speak what I have seen with My Father, and you do what you have
seen with your father." (John 8:38).
"And to the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write, 'These things
says the Amen, the Faithful and True Witness, the Beginning of the
creation of God...'" (Revelation 3:14); "These are the words of the
Amen, the faithful and true witness, the prime source of all God's
creation..." (New English Bible).
"That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have
seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have
handled, concerning the Word of life - the life was manifested, and we
have seen, and bear witness, and declare to you that eternal life
which was with the Father and was manifested to us - that which we
have seen and heard we declare to you, that you also may have
fellowship with us; and truly our fellowship is with the Father and
with His Son Jesus Christ." (1 John 1:1-3).
"And we know that the Son of God has come and has given us an
understanding, that we may know Him who is true; and we are in Him who
is true, in His Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God and eternal
life." (1 John 5:20).
"...giving thanks to the Father who has qualified us to be partakers
of the inheritance of the saints in the light. He has delivered us
from the power of darkness and conveyed us into the kingdom of the Son
of His love...He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over
all creation. For by Him all things were created that are in heaven
and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or
dominions or principalities or powers. All things were created through
Him and for Him. And He is before all things, and in Him all things
consist." (Colossians 1:12-17).
"God, who at various times and in various ways spoke in time past to
the fathers by the prophets, has in these last days spoken to us by
His Son, whom He has appointed heir of all things, through whom also
He made the worlds..." (Hebrews 1:1-2).
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the
Word was God. He was in the beginning with God." (John 1:1-2).
"But to the Son He says: 'Your throne, O God, is forever and ever; A
scepter of righteousness is the scepter of Your kingdom'...And: 'You,
LORD, in the beginning laid the foundation of the earth, And the
heavens are the work of Your hands. They will perish, but You remain;
And they will all grow old like a garment; Like a cloak You will fold
them up, And they will be changed. But You are the same, And Your
years will not fail.'" (Hebrews 1:8-12).
"Let each of you look out not only for his own interests, but also for
the interests of others. Let this mind be in you which was also in
Christ Jesus, who, being in the form of God, did not consider it
robbery to be equal with God, but made Himself of no reputation,
taking the form of a bondservant, and coming in the likeness of men.
And being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself and became
obedient to the point of death, even the death of the cross."
(Philippians 2:4-8).
"This is He of whom I said, 'After me comes a Man who is preferred
before me, for He was before me.'" (John 1:30).
"For I know that my Redeemer lives, And He shall stand at last on the
earth; And after my skin is destroyed, this I know, That in my flesh I
shall see God, Whom I shall see for myself, And my eyes shall behold,
and not another." (Job 19:25-27).
"Then the Jews said to Him, 'You are not yet fifty years old, and have
You seen Abraham?' Jesus said to them, 'Most assuredly, I say to you,
before Abraham was, I AM.'" (John 8:57-58).
"Father, I desire that they also whom You gave Me may be with Me where
I am, that they may behold My glory which You have given Me; for You
loved Me before the foundation of the world." (John 17:24).
"For you know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that though He was
rich, yet for your sakes He became poor, that you through His poverty
might become rich." (2 Corinthians 8:9).
"...and to make all see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which
from the beginning of the ages has been hidden in God who created all
things through Jesus Christ..." (Ephesians 3:9).
"What then if you should see the Son of Man ascend where He was
before?" (John 6:62).
"No one has ascended to heaven but He who came down from heaven, that
is, the Son of Man who is in heaven." (John 3:13).
"For I have come down from heaven, not to do My own will, but the will
of Him who sent Me." (John 6:38).
"...and then also king of Salem, meaning 'king of peace,' without
father, without mother, without genealogy, having neither beginning of
days nor end of life, but made like the Son of God, remains a priest
continually." (Hebrews 7:3).
"Moreover, brethren, I do not want you to be unaware that all our
fathers were under the cloud, all passed through the sea, all were
baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea, all ate the same
spiritual food, and all drank the same spiritual drink. For they
drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them, and that Rock was
Christ." (1 Corinthians 10:1-4)
What difference does it make?: how can you obey the Lord's
instructions to honor the Son even as we honor the Father: "That all
men should honour the Son, even as they honour the Father. He that
honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father which hath sent him."
(John 5:23) - if you've been taught to demean 'the Son' as 'the flesh'
of Jesus of Nazareth, the way the 'Oneness' Pentecostals have been
taught?
---
Huldah
For the Bible truth about 'Oneness' Pentecostalism, see:
http://sites.netscape.net/trisagionseraph/op.html
Heresy of the day:
>[MB] When Jesus prayed, it was as every other man and woman. He did not see God,
>He did not think that, as a human being, he was God. He prayed as FLESH
>prays, demonstrating quite soundly that ALL FLESH must pray."
(Mark Bassett, UPC 'minister,' 2/14/01)
Huldah
>I will also ask you a question and if you answer me then shall i answer you your
>questions.
>
>In the book of Isaiah it is written
> For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall
>be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The
>mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.
>
>If Isaiah called him the everlasting Father (and we know that the scripture
>cannot be broken).
>
>How Then is God his Father?
Elijah, there are two scriptures in the Bible which seem at first
glance to testify in favor of 'Oneness' Pentecostalism, the one you
quote and John 14:9: "Jesus said to him, 'Have I been with you so
long, and yet you have not known Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has
seen the Father; so how can you say, "Show us the Father'? Do you not
believe that I am in the Father, and the Father in Me? The words that
I speak to you I do not speak on My own authority; but the Father who
dwells in Me does the works." (John 14:9-10)
The 'Oneness' Pentecostals would like to slam the book shut at verse
9, forcing the conclusion that those who have seen Jesus have seen the
Father because Jesus is the Father. But not only does that contradict
other clear scripture, it also contradicts Jesus' own explanation, to
Philip, of what He means, in the very next line: "Do you not believe
that I am in the Father, and the Father in Me? The words that I speak
to you I do not speak on My own authority; but the Father who dwells
in Me does the works." (John 14:10). It's a Biblical fact that the
Father is in the Son, and the Son is in the Father: "...that they all
may be one, as You, Father, are in Me, and I in You; that they also
may be one in Us, that the world may believe that You sent Me." (John
17:21) - likewise, the Holy Spirit in the Son: "Then Jesus, being
filled with the Holy Spirit, returned from the Jordan and was led by
the Spirit into the wilderness..." (Luke 4:1); likewise, Christ and
the Father in the Holy Spirit: "...in whom the whole building, being
fitted together, grows into a holy temple in the Lord, in whom you
also are being built together for a dwelling place of God in the
Spirit." (Ephesians 2:21-22).
"The Father is in Me, and I in Him:" Circumincession is the Bible
fact that the Father is in the Son, the Son is in the Father, the Holy
Spirit is in the Son and in the Father, and the Son and Father are in
the Holy Spirit. An old word picture of circumincession is the image
of three lamps: three wicks suspended in one reservoir of
oil...burning with three flames but shining with one indivisible,
interpenetrating light. "Let me resort here to examples from what we
perceive and from what is familiar. In a house the light from all the
lamps is completely interpenetrating, yet each is clearly distinct.
There is distinction in unity and there is unity in distinction. When
there are many lamps in a house there is nevertheless a single
undifferentiated light and from all of them comes the one undivided
brightness. I do not think that anyone would mark off the light of
one lamp from another in the atmosphere which contains them all, nor
could one light be seen separately from the others since all of them
are completely mingled while being at the same time quite
distinctive." (Pseudo-Dionysius, The Divine Names, Chapter 1, 641B).
Here are the Bible facts:
The Father is in the Son: "If I do not do the works of My Father, do
not believe Me; but if I do, though you do not believe Me, believe the
works, that you may know and believe that the Father is in Me, and I
in Him.'" (John 10:37-38).
"Do you not believe that I am in the Father, and the Father in Me? The
words that I speak to you I do not speak on My own authority; but the
Father who dwells in Me does the works. Believe Me that I am in the
Father and the Father in Me, or else believe Me for the sake of the
works themselves." (John 14:10-11).
"...that they all may be one, as You, Father, are in Me, and I in You;
that they also may be one in Us, that the world may believe that You
sent Me." (John 17:21).
The Son is in the Father: "At that day you will know that I am in My
Father, and you in Me, and I in you." (John 14:20).
"No one has seen God at any time. The only begotten Son, who is in
the bosom of the Father, He has declared Him." (John 1:18).
The Holy Spirit is in the Son: "Then Jesus, being filled with the Holy
Spirit, returned from the Jordan and was led by the Spirit into the
wilderness..." (Luke 4:1).
"Behold! My Servant whom I uphold, My Elect One in whom My soul
delights! I have put My Spirit upon Him; He will bring forth justice
to the Gentiles." (Isaiah 42:1).
"The Spirit of the Lord GOD is upon Me, Because the LORD has anointed
Me To preach good tidings to the poor; He has sent Me to heal the
brokenhearted, To proclaim liberty to the captives, And the opening of
the prison to those who are bound; To proclaim the acceptable year of
the LORD, And the day of vengeance of our God; To comfort all who
mourn, To console those who mourn in Zion, To give them beauty for
ashes, The oil of joy for mourning, The garment of praise for the
spirit of heaviness; That they may be called trees of righteousness,
The planting of the LORD, that He may be glorified." (Isaiah 61:1-3,
Luke 4:18-19).
"For He whom God has sent speaks the words of God, for God does not
give the Spirit by measure." (John 3:34).
The Holy Spirit is in the Father: "But God has revealed them to us
through His Spirit. For the Spirit searches all things, yes, the deep
things of God. For what man knows the things of a man except the
spirit of the man which is in him? Even so no one knows the things of
God except the Spirit of God." (1 Corinthians 2:10-11).
The Father is in the Holy Spirit: "...in whom the whole building,
being fitted together, grows into a holy temple in the Lord, in whom
you also are being built together for a dwelling place of God in the
Spirit." (Ephesians 2:21-22).
The Son is in the Holy Spirit: Jesus promised to abide with those who
loved Him: "Jesus answered and said to him, 'If anyone loves Me, he
will keep My word; and My Father will love him, and We will come to
him and make Our home with him.'" (John 14:23). Specifically, He
promised His followers that the Holy Spirit would come to dwell in
them: "And I will pray the Father, and He will give you another
Helper, that He may abide with you forever - the Spirit of truth, whom
the world cannot receive, because it neither sees Him nor knows Him;
but you know Him, for He dwells with you and will be in you. I will
not leave you orphans; I will come to you." (John 14:16-18). It is by
the infilling of the Holy Spirit that Jesus dwells in our hearts: "For
this reason I bow my knees to the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ,
from whom the whole family in heaven and earth is named, that He would
grant you, according to the riches of His glory, to be strengthened
with might through His Spirit in the inner man, that Christ may dwell
in your hearts through faith..." (Ephesians 3:14-17). Only if Jesus
were in the Holy Spirit could this be one of the means by which Jesus
dwells with His sheep.
The 'Oneness' Pentecostals want to understand the Bible truth that the
Father is in the Son to mean that 'the Spirit' is in 'the flesh' -
leaving the correlative Bible truth, that the Son is in the Father,
oddly stranded: "At that day you will know that I am in My Father, and
you in Me, and I in you." (John 14:20). Or is 'the flesh' in 'the
Spirit'?
Also, Jesus is the Image of God the Father: "But even if our gospel is
veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing, whose minds the god
of this age has blinded, who do not believe, lest the light of the
gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine
on them." (2 Corinthians 4:3-4). Jesus said that if you'd seen Him,
you'd also seen the One who sent Him: "And he who sees Me sees Him who
sent Me." (John 12:45). He is the image of the invisible God: "He is
the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation."
(Colossians 1:15). (Incidentally, it's long before the incarnation
that Christ is called "the image of the invisible God"; it's this
"image", the "firstborn", who is said to have created "all things"!)
He is the "express image" of God the Father, a more perfect copy than
any ever traced by human skill: "...who being the brightness of His
glory and the express image of His person, and upholding all things by
the word of His power, when He had by Himself purged our sins, sat
down at the right hand of the Majesty on high,..." (Hebrews 1:3).
(Again, since the author of Hebrews is speaking of "his Son" as the
One "by whom also he made the worlds", certainly this is not a
reference restricted to the incarnation). It's as the image of the
invisible God that the glory even of God the Father shines forth in
Him: "For it is the God who commanded light to shine out of darkness,
who has shone in our hearts to give the light of the knowledge of the
glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ." (2 Corinthians 4:6).
"For unto us a Child is born, Unto us a Son is given; And the
government will be upon His shoulder. And His name will be called
Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of
Peace." (Isaiah 9:6).
The two considerations mentioned above: circumincession and 'express
image' - are relevant also to Isaiah 9:6. Some commentators prefer to
translate "Everlasting Father" literally, as 'Father of eternity',
which Jesus was as the Logos. In accordance with common Old Testament
idiom, the owner or possessor of a given thing is named 'father of'
it: 'Abiathar' (1 Samuel 22:22) means 'father of abundance', 'Abiezar'
(1 Chronicles 11:28) means 'father of help.' As the creator of the
aeons (Hebrews 1:2; 11:3), Jesus is the father of eternity, but He is
not His own Father: "the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ" (2
Corinthians 1:3).
Another sense in which He bears the name of the Father is because He
is the Angel of His presence. He bore the name of the Father, wearing
it proudly during the times of His pilgrimage with the children of
Israel through the wilderness: "Behold, I send an Angel before you to
keep you in the way and to bring you into the place which I have
prepared. Beware of Him and obey His voice; do not provoke Him, for
He will not pardon your transgressions; for My name is in Him."
(Exodus 23:20-21). This is the Angel of His presence, "In all their
affliction He was afflicted, And the Angel of His Presence saved them;
In His love and in His pity He redeemed them; And He bore them and
carried them All the days of old." (Isaiah 63:9). This Angel of His
presence was Christ, who disciplined the children in the wilderness:
"...nor let us tempt Christ, as some of them also tempted, and were
destroyed by serpents;..." (1 Corinthians 10:9).
Mark Bassett
news:3a8d89dc...@news.watchic.net...
> What difference does it make?: how can you obey the Lord's
> instructions to honor the Son even as we honor the Father: "That all
> men should honour the Son, even as they honour the Father. He that
> honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father which hath sent him."
> (John 5:23) - if you've been taught to demean 'the Son' as 'the flesh'
> of Jesus of Nazareth, the way the 'Oneness' Pentecostals have been
> taught?
Simple question.. this would be another to go unanswered, most likely, but
anyway:
On what basis does a critic say that recognition of the Lord Jesus Christ as
flesh "DEMEANS" the Son.
1) We do not say that He is only flesh, He is DEITY, and ...
2) Does the Trinitarian refuse to honor the flesh of God in Jesus Christ,
because of some theological issue?
Why would you refuse to honor flesh, when it is our Lord Jesus?
The Bible says that, in honoring the Son, you are honoring the Father.
It does not say that you must deny that He is a man to do so. I personally
believe the MAN deserves honor, and praise. He is the ONLY selfless,
perfect, lover of souls that has ever existed in human flesh. Where Adam
failed, and sat somberly, carelessly silent while a serpent beguiled his
loved one, Jesus Christ rebuked and cast out the devil.
Mark Bassett
> Heresy of the day:
> >[MB] When Jesus prayed, it was as every other man and woman. He did not
see God,
> >He did not think that, as a human being, he was God. He prayed as FLESH
> >prays, demonstrating quite soundly that ALL FLESH must pray."
> (Mark Bassett, UPC 'minister,' 2/14/01)
Jesus Christ did not pray as a human being?
That's the kind of comment I would expect from an apostate.
I made several statements here, which the spiritless, unconverted religious
professor cannot agree with:
1) Jesus Christ did not see God. Yet Jesus was a man, amd men do not see God
for God is invisible. The Apostle teaches that he lives by the faith OF the
Son of God. Faith is not faith when it sees in the natural, but when it
believes and entrusts and depends on the unseen, for faith is the substance
of things unseen. Jesus Christ walked BY FAITH, as all who follow Him are to
walk. He was, in His earthly ministry, the perfect example and elder brother
of all who would believe on Him.
2) Jesus Christ prayed as a man. That is, to maintain his strength, and to
surpress his pride, and put His soul and body under subjection, he prayed in
FAITH.
3) He did not think that, as a human being, he was God.
Jesus was approached by a man who greeted him as "Good Master". Jesus
imemdiately stated: "There is none good, save one, that is God." While he
knew his identity, he knew that man did not know, and therefore questioned
this man's calling the MAN that he saw "good".
Jesus refered to Himself as "the Son of Man", and attributed to Himself,
with humility, the destiny of flesh, that is to walk subject to God, and to
die if separated from God.
As God, Jesus properly identified Himself as the Creator: "Before Abraham
was I AM", and "I and the Father are one", but as man, he identified
himself as a servant of man, " .. he poureth water into a bason, and began
to wash the disciples' feet , and to wipe [them] with the towel wherewith
he was girded", and the perfect spotless Lamb that was offered by the unjust
as final propitiation.
When Jesus prayed, he prayed as FLESH prays, and when they sought to learn
to pray, for He was indeed the Second and Last Adam, Jesus taught them to
pray as HE prayed.
In these days, as in all times past, the sinners rail and cry out against
the Truth, proposing that they in their silly religious robes can thereby
pretend to possess the treasure of heaven that He has entrusted to babes and
to the faithful.
Elijah
rather that i might know what manner of spirit you were of.
And it saddens my soul to see that this manner of debate has cause thee to
become bitter, and angry. This is not what the Lord desires for thy soul.
I wrote it so that i might know how that i might be able to pray for thee,
not that whether thou art right or whether i am right, but rather that you
might know him.
And what if I did answer your ten questions. would that make you a better
man in christ? would it compel thy soul to seek after him more and more,
or would thine anger overwelm thee and cause you to stubble at the rock of
offense.
My desire is not that ye stumble, but rather that ye stand.
My prayers are with thee. May thou walk in the blessing of the Lord, and
may you stand in the stedfastness of his love.
read the Letter to America
http://www.lsccr.net/
Sincerely
Elijah
I am the voice of one crying in the wilderness
Prepare ye the way of the Lord
Huldah
> I did ask you the question with the intentions of recieving an answer, but
> rather that i might know what manner of spirit you were of.
>
> And it saddens my soul to see that this manner of debate has cause thee to
> become bitter, and angry. This is not what the Lord desires for thy soul.
>
> I wrote it so that i might know how that i might be able to pray for thee,
> not that whether thou art right or whether i am right, but rather that you
> might know him.
>
> And what if I did answer your ten questions. would that make you a better
> man in christ? would it compel thy soul to seek after him more and more,
> or would thine anger overwelm thee and cause you to stubble at the rock of
> offense.
>
> My desire is not that ye stumble, but rather that ye stand.
>
> My prayers are with thee. May thou walk in the blessing of the Lord, and
> may you stand in the stedfastness of his love.
>
> read the Letter to America
> http://www.lsccr.net/
Elijah, you're offering unbiblical schlock on this web-site which God never
told you:
From web-site:
----------------------------------------------
1:6. And again, I am in him, and he dwelleth in me: the Spirit is all, but
the body is one, Christ Jesus.
[...]
1:8. Therefore go ye, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name
belonging to the Spirit, and belong to the Body, and belonging to the Living
Soul.
[...]
1:26. But I say unto you, That my Body and my Spirit are one, reuniting that
which hath been separated for so long.
1:27. And again, Holy Spirit, the hour is come; glorify thy Body, that thy
Body also may glorify thee.
1:28. And furthermore, it is written, That all men should honour the Body,
even as they honour the Spirit. He that honoureth not the Body, honoureth
not the Spirit which hath sent him.
[...]
1:31. For we know that the Father is the Holy Spirit; and the Son is the
Body, and the Holy Ghost is the Living Soul.
-------------------------------
(End quote from your website)
This is standard 'Oneness' Pentecostal pabulum, not a revelation from God.
"Christ Jesus" is not the "body" of God, as you claim. Christ is eternal,
having sojourned with the children of Israel in the wilderness: "And did all
drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that
followed them: and that Rock was Christ." (1 Corinthians 10:4). His goings
forth are from everlasting: "But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be
little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth
unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of
old, from everlasting." (Micah 5:2).
You should not be pretending to have received as a revelation from God what
you were taught by men - and ignorant men at that. You are the sort of
prophet Jeremiah ran into:
"I have not sent these prophets, yet they ran: I have not spoken to them,
yet they prophesied. But if they had stood in my counsel, and had caused my
people to hear my words, then they should have turned them from their evil
way, and from the evil of their doings. Am I a God at hand, saith the LORD,
and not a God afar off? Can any hide himself in secret places that I shall
not see him? saith the LORD. Do not I fill heaven and earth? saith the LORD.
I have heard what the prophets said, that prophesy lies in my name, saying,
I have dreamed, I have dreamed. How long shall this be in the heart of the
prophets that prophesy lies? yea, they are prophets of the deceit of their
own heart; Which think to cause my people to forget my name by their dreams
which they tell every man to his neighbour, as their fathers have forgotten
my name for Baal. The prophet that hath a dream, let him tell a dream; and
he that hath my word, let him speak my word faithfully. What is the chaff to
the wheat? saith the LORD. Is not my word like as a fire? saith the LORD;
and like a hammer that breaketh the rock in pieces? Therefore, behold, I am
against the prophets, saith the LORD, that steal my words every one from his
neighbour. Behold, I am against the prophets, saith the LORD, that use
their tongues, and say, He saith. Behold, I am against them that prophesy
false dreams, saith the LORD, and do tell them, and cause my people to err
by their lies, and by their lightness; yet I sent them not, nor commanded
them: therefore they shall not profit this people at all, saith the LORD."
(Jeremiah 23:21-31).
> Sincerely
> Elijah
> I am the voice of one crying in the wilderness
> Prepare ye the way of the Lord
No, you're not.
joybelle
> Now dealing with the actually verse, I can give you a text book answer...
But not a Biblical one apparently.....
> Why? Because the verse is so frequently cited (infact its the only one
they
> have), by brainwashed OneNess people. The fact is, most probably havent
> even studied the context, the chapter, or even the book, to see what this
> revelation means.
But as anyone can clearly see, James has failed to provide any scripture at
all. Has he read the whole chapter of Isaiah 9?
> But you can be sure, they know verse ;0) Just like the
> Mormons know their key proof verses, and the JW's when they knock on your
> door.
>
You mean trinitarians don't know "key verses" to quote when asked about a
certain topic or event or belief? HAHAHAHA!!
> The verse was not given to identify "the child", as the "person" or
> "manifestation" of the Father in the new testiment.
That's funny, looks to me like that verse says "and his name (referring to
"the child") shall be called.....".
> OneNess pentecostals
> give meaning to this verse, that the author clearly had no point in
> conveying. Its interesting to note that the term "everlasting Father" is
> found nowhere else in the entire bible.
That means that it's not as true as if it had been mentioned two or three
times. Did you also know that "counsellor", "Prince of Peace", "Lion of
Judah", "Rose of Sharon" and "Lily of the valleys" are also mentinoed only
once in reference to God? I guess it's not what we think it means either,
since it's not mentioned more than once, right?
> The verse is establishing the
> child's royality, his princehood, and even his diety, and his everlasting
> reign.
Look at Isaiah 9"6 and Isaiah 63:16. Is the definition of "father" differnt
in both of these verses?
> But nowhere is their an attempt to map the childs identity to one of
> the three distinct persona's of God found in the new testament.
Therefore the OT is false.
> So whatever
> is meant by "everlasting father", it certainly cannot be used as a proof
> text for explaining the distinctions between the Father, the Son & the
Holy
> Spirit.
It's not used as a distinction.
> Usage of this verse, only proves some kind of desperate
> "last-ditch" attempt at proving a doctrine that is unsupportable
everywhere
> else in the Bible.
>
Can you prove differently? It seems that you can't.
> Quoting Boyd on the issue of Isa 9:6:
>
> "Seen in this light, it becomes clear, as virtually every reputable
> commentator on Isaiah has seen, that Isaiah's use of "father" (av or ab)
has
> nothing to do with the formal title of "Father",
How so? In what way is "father" in the OT different from that of "father"
in the NT?
> which develops in the New
> Testament out of Jesus' unique and revelatory relationship with God.
> "Father" wasnt even a standard title of God in the Old Testament!
Neither was "son"!! Gasp!
> In short,
> this verse does not teach that Jesus is "the God and Father of our Lord
> Jesus Christ"; it does not, in other words, teach that Jesus is his own
> Father.
>
Well, that would only mean something if that was what I was claiming in the
first place, which I am not!
> The title, as well as the other titles employed in Isa 9:6,
You mean that it's titles, not names, that are in that verse?! Now, who and
where have I argued this with before?
Neither does it say that Jesus is instead "God the Son".
I am disappoined that James didn't go to the Bible to answer the above
questions, as he claims that I do.
Joy
Elijah
> you were taught by men - and ignorant men at that. You are the sort of
> prophet Jeremiah ran into:
My soul grieves for thee,
I am neither a Trinitarian or a Oneness, I am a servant of the Lord Jesus
Christ which this day thou has blasphemed
therefore this day have i delivered thy soul over to satan that thou mayest
learn not to blaspheme, for I neither recieved
this testimony of man, neither did any man declare the things which have been
written.
I percieve that thou art in the galls of biiterness, and thy soul is much
troubled.
Bitterness is an evil disease, and a loathsome sore which devoureth the body
more and more.
therefore go to the plowman and require his plow, and take ye salt and remember
the fire.
And furthermore if I am a false prophet as thou sayest that i am.
Am I seeking to make a gain of thy soul or rather am i not seeking that thou
wouldest look unto the Lord who is thy salvation
Am I seeking to come in mine own name or rather am i not seeking to come unto
you in the name of the Lord for thy salvation
and not for thy hurt.
Am I seeking to glorify myself or am i not rather seeking to bring glory to the
Lord my God which has saved me by his eternal grace.
Sincerely
Elijah
I am the voice of one crying in the wilderness
Prepare ye the way of the Lord
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
James Pearce
Your not related to Peter of Canada are you?
He fancies himself a oracle of God to.
:0)
James.
Kornbelt
See John 8:38
> Yet Jesus was a man, amd men do not see God for God is invisible.
John saw God. (Rev 4:2) So did Isaiah. (Isa 6:5).
> The Apostle teaches that he lives by the faith OF the
> Son of God. Faith is not faith when it sees in the natural, but when it
> believes and entrusts and depends on the unseen, for faith is the
substance
> of things unseen.
Faith has absolutely nothing to do with seeing God or not. Pistis is trust.
Abraham was the "Father of pistis" (Rom 4:16) whom we are to emulate, and he
saw Yahweh on more than one occasion. (Gen 18,
> Jesus Christ walked BY FAITH, as all who follow Him are to walk.
This means he fully trusted the Father. It doesn't mean he didn't see him.
> 2) Jesus Christ prayed as a man.
Of course he did, since he *was* a man. A man who was "one with the Father",
trusted the Father perfectly, and always did His will.
> As God, Jesus properly identified Himself as the Creator: "Before Abraham
> was I AM", and "I and the Father are one", but as man, he identified
> himself as a servant of man,
As a man He was still the I Am. (John 8:58) That didn't change. Only his
bodily nature, authority and power changed while he was mortal. In other
words, he laid aside His godness. (Phil 2:). It was only a temporary
kenosis.
There is no Biblical justification for using the terms "as man" and "as God"
(whatever one may mean by this) with respect to Jesus, as if He was two
persons. He simply a man who is God. The one person Yeshua was God (John
1:1) (more specifically the Angel of Yahweh (See LXX of Zech 1:7, 2:12) )
who took on a mortal human body for awhile (, and now is back to the status
and immortal incarnation he was prior to that (John 17:5), next to the
Father on the throne (Rev 3:21), to use the Biblical metaphor, wielding all
authority and power that he received from his Father. (Mat 28:18, Eph
1:20,21, etc.)
" .. he poureth water into a bason, and began
> to wash the disciples' feet , and to wipe [them] with the towel wherewith
> he was girded", and the perfect spotless Lamb that was offered by the
unjust
> as final propitiation.
He came to serve. We must do likewise. It becomes easier to do when we know
that His inheritance is our inheritance. (1 John 3:2-3, Rom 8:17, 2 Cor 8:9,
Col 2:9,10, Rev 3:21)
> When Jesus prayed, he prayed as FLESH prays,
Flesh doesn't pray. Persons pray with their flesh. Jesus isn't simply
"flesh." He is a person who communicated with His Father.
> In these days, as in all times past, the sinners rail and cry out against
> the Truth, proposing that they in their silly religious robes can thereby
> pretend to possess the treasure of heaven that He has entrusted to babes
and
> to the faithful.
Thank Yahweh for His Grace.
KB
Kornbelt
> anyone's theology change? Does anyone draw closer to God?
Maybe not the participants. But the dialog can affect undecided lurkers. I
know this from the several private emails I have received from such people.
KB
Kornbelt
as
> flesh "DEMEANS" the Son.
"Flesh" isn't a person. Flesh (sarx) only refers to the physical matter.
Yeshua is not only "flesh", but is a spirit, like any other person. (Luke
23:46) This spirit-person cannot be the Father, obviously, given that Yeshua
is praying to the Father. Thus, if the Oneness view is correct, "Jesus" is
really a two-persons-in-one configuration.
> 1) We do not say that He is only flesh, He is DEITY, and ...
Regarding the "spirit" of Yeshua mentioned above (Luke 23:46), is that
spirit "flesh" or "Deity", in your view? Obviously, it would be ridiculous
to say it was "flesh", since spirits are not flesh by definition. So then,
was it Deity? Was Deity (in the sense you define it) commending itself to
Deity?
> 2) Does the Trinitarian refuse to honor the flesh of God in Jesus Christ,
> because of some theological issue?
The "flesh" is simply a physical body made of atoms, that the Logos
incarnated Himself into. Yeshua's toenails were no more "Deity" than a rock
on the beach. Both are simply created things. What matters in that *who*
that was attached to that body. He was the (Angel of) Yahweh.
> Why would you refuse to honor flesh, when it is our Lord Jesus?
"The flesh profits nothing. My *words* are spirit and they are life." Yeshua
came to A) *tell* us things, and B) suffer in body at the hands of evil men,
as a covering for our sins. In short, the body of Yeshua was a useful tool
just like any other useful tool. Not worthy of worship. The person
incarnated into that body is worthy of worship.
> The Bible says that, in honoring the Son, you are honoring the Father.
That's not talking about honoring flesh. Rather it refers to the person
known as the Son during a mortal incarnation. The Logos/Angel-of-Yahweh was
honorned as the Father is honored long before His incarnation, because the
Father gave him "the Name" long ago. (Exo 23:21) When Yeshua incarnated into
a mortal body, he laid aside "the Name", that is, his authority and station
(Phil 2:5-11), and now has it restored to Him again (Rev 2:27, 3:12, 3:21,
Eph 1:20,21, John 17:5, etc, etc.)
This is all very easy to see when you understand that:
A) The Arm of Yahweh is the Angel of Yahweh (Isa 63:5, 9, 12)
B) The Angel of Yahweh is "God" and "Yahweh" (Jdg 6:12,14, 13:15,22)
C) The Arm/Angel of Yahweh has the "Name" in Him and represents Another (Exo
23:21)
D) The Arm/Angel of Yahweh is subordinate to Another (Zech 1:12)
E) Jesus is the Arm of Yahweh. (Isa 52:10, 53:1, John 12:38)
The typical Oneness defense against the Angel of Yahweh evidence is that
it's "just a theophane of the Father", etc. However, (A) and (C) rule that
out.
> It does not say that you must deny that He is a man to do so. I personally
> believe the MAN deserves honor, and praise.
Do you honor and praise his toenails? Get real. The body is just a tool that
spirits use to interact with other spirits in this spacetime universe.
Yeshua needed no physical body when he was in the "spirit realm", in
paradise with the thief. (Luke 23:43) The body deserves no honor or worship
any more than you love a hammer that your wife uses to put up your picture,
just because it's in her hand. The body is a tool of the spirit. Worship the
*spirit* person who inhabits that body, the one who said, "Father into your
hands I commend my spirit." For that spirit-person created you and the earth
on behalf of His Father. (John 1:3) But in order to worship that
spirit-person Yeshua, you must first acknowledge that He exists. OPs seems
to have trouble with Yeshua-the-spirit, numerically distinct from the
Father.
KB
Kornbelt
"James Pearce" <ja...@nospamthanks.com> wrote in message
news:98250161...@helium.indigo.net.au...
Mark Bassett
news:7Jfk6.144022$P5.30...@news1.rdc1.il.home.com...
> > When Jesus prayed, he prayed as FLESH prays,
>
> Flesh doesn't pray. Persons pray with their flesh. Jesus isn't simply
> "flesh." He is a person who communicated with His Father.
The term flesh, in scripture, generally means "humanity". This is the
definition that I used above.
Kornbelt
> >
> > Flesh doesn't pray. Persons pray with their flesh. Jesus isn't simply
> > "flesh." He is a person who communicated with His Father.
>
> The term flesh, in scripture, generally means "humanity". This is the
> definition that I used above.
Where do you place the numerically distinct spirit-person mentioned in Luke
23:46? Is that "Deity" or "humanity" ?
KB
Mark Bassett
> > On what basis does a critic say that recognition of the Lord Jesus
Christ
> as
> > flesh "DEMEANS" the Son.
>
> "Flesh" isn't a person. Flesh (sarx) only refers to the physical matter.
That is not true.
"Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the
faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might
be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by
the works of the law shall no flesh be justified. "
Physical matter is neither justified nor unjustified. It is the human being
that needs justification.
"And base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God
chosen, [yea], and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are:
That no flesh should glory in his presence. "
Physical material does not "glory", rather it is the HUMAN BEING that
glories.
"That which is born of the flesh is flesh ; and that which is born of the
Spirit is spirit. "
The constrast to birth of the Spirit, is human birth, which makes humanity,
not merely a piece of flesh.
" And all flesh shall see the salvation of God. "
It is HUMANITY which will see salvation, when God sends it.
The material substance is a part of humanity.
Mark Bassett
Why must it be either/or?
Jesus Christ is God come in and as humanity.
It was the HUMANITY into which He was born that made DEATH possible, as
oxogen and combustable material together make fire possible.
Kornbelt
"Mark Bassett" <mba...@optonline.net> wrote in message
news:atgk6.75735$%g3.12...@news02.optonline.net...
>
> "Kornbelt" <korn...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:Hogk6.144044$P5.30...@news1.rdc1.il.home.com...
> > > > > When Jesus prayed, he prayed as FLESH prays,
> > > >
> > > > Flesh doesn't pray. Persons pray with their flesh. Jesus isn't
simply
> > > > "flesh." He is a person who communicated with His Father.
> > >
> > > The term flesh, in scripture, generally means "humanity". This is the
> > > definition that I used above.
> >
> > Where do you place the numerically distinct spirit-person mentioned in
> Luke
> > 23:46? Is that "Deity" or "humanity" ?
>
> Why must it be either/or?
Well the implications should be obvious. The Deity-Substance, if you will,
by definition is the uncreated, unbegotten, unchangable God- "The Father."
And there is only one Deity-Substance. (Or do you have another definition?)
If the numerically distinct spirit-person, who prayed *to* the Father (who
is certainly the one Deity-Substance in your view), is Himself the one
Deity-Substance also, and yet is not the Father, then congratulations- you
have a belief identical to trinitarianism. (Multiple persons (hypostasis),
one Deity-Substance (ousia).)
Otherwise, if the numerically distinct spirit-person is a created person
like you and I, whose being does not consist of the one Deity-Substance with
the Father, then how could it called the one Deity-Substance without
equivocation or contradiction?
> Jesus Christ is God come in and as humanity.
That's totally meaningless without greater precision. Both trinitarians and
oneness people can accept that statement as true, yet both pour entirely
different meaning into the words. But goal with you is to get you to be
precise. This is difficult thing with Oneness people, I have found. And it's
no wonder. The Oneness view simply cannot stand up when the terms are
precisely defined. It always leads to contradiction or equivocation.
(Trinitarianism suffers from going to far, but that's another subject.)
> It was the HUMANITY into which He was born that made DEATH possible, as
> oxogen and combustable material together make fire possible.
What I am concerned about here is your concept of the numerically distinct
spirit-person referred to in Luke 23:46.) It is evident that this
spirit-person is quite capable of living without a human body, given that He
went to paradise with the thief, so any reference to physical bodies is
beside the issue. I want to know what you think about that spirit-person who
was commended to the Father, and was with theif in paradise.
Was that spirit-person a created spirit?
If so, who created him and when?
If not, what was he prior to physical human incarnation?
Where was he prior to physical human incarnation?
Do you acknowledge that the Angel of Yahweh possessed the "Name" of Yahweh?
Do you acknowledge that the Angel of Yahweh is a numerically distinct person
from the "Most High"?
Do you acknowledge that the Angel of Yahweh is the "Arm of Yahweh"?
Do you acknowledge that Yeshua is the Arm of Yahweh?
KB
Kornbelt
> Christ
> > as
> > > flesh "DEMEANS" the Son.
> >
> > "Flesh" isn't a person. Flesh (sarx) only refers to the physical matter.
>
> That is not true.
>
> "Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the
> faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we
might
> be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for
by
> the works of the law shall no flesh be justified. "
>
> Physical matter is neither justified nor unjustified. It is the human
being
> that needs justification.
I agree regarding faith and justification, as Paul taught, so I don't know
what you mean by "that is not true" above. The fact is, "sarx" in no way
refers to a mind, spirit, soul, but is limited to physical matter. Check any
Koine lexicon.
> "And base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God
> chosen, [yea], and things which are not, to bring to nought things that
are:
> That no flesh should glory in his presence. "
>
> Physical material does not "glory", rather it is the HUMAN BEING that
> glories.
Spirits specifically is it minds that glory. Spirits are not sarx by
defition. They certainly operate *through* sarx, but they are not sarx.
> "That which is born of the flesh is flesh ; and that which is born of
the
> Spirit is spirit. "
Yes, indeed. Which is precisely the point. Of course. Spirits are not flesh.
Yeshua furnishes a clear contrast between spirit (pseuma) and flesh (sarx.)
And for obvious reasons. Spirits and bodies do not exist on the same plane
of existence, and bodies die and rot, and are eaten by worms, and recycled
into nature, while spirits are eternal imperishable things that are the real
you. Yes, you will receive a resurrected body. But the fundamental you, the
spirit-person, does not need it to exist, or to interact with other spirits,
as Yeshua made clear with his statement to the thief.
(This dovetails with the other post regarding the numerically distinct
spirit-person of Yeshua referred to in Luke 23:46. Do you believe that is a
created spirit, or a begotten spirit?)
> The constrast to birth of the Spirit, is human birth, which makes
humanity,
> not merely a piece of flesh.
Bodies die and rot in the dust. Spirits are eternal. Yeshua and the thief
continued to exist in paradise after their bodies died. Bodies are not
necessary for existence. They are not fundamental. They are tools of the
spirit-person to work in this physical universe. "Humanity" is just dirt
when the spirit (the real you) is disconnected, destined to be eaten by
worms.
> " And all flesh shall see the salvation of God. "
>
> It is HUMANITY which will see salvation, when God sends it.
> The material substance is a part of humanity.
I never said it wasn't. But you seems to be missing the point. Spirits are
not flesh. I'm wondering about the *spirit* of Jesus, not his physical body,
that was obviously a material creation. I talking about that spirit who
continued to exist independenly in paradise *after* he left his body. Was
that a created thing or not? Did it share the one Deity-substance with the
Father, or not?
KB
Peter of Canada
Do you still maintain that the spirit that animates you is of God?
What possessed you to lash out at me just now? I was not a part of this
conversation yet you decided to take the opportunity to mock me by comparing
me to this fellow who speaks in King James' Old English.
The hatred that is in your heart does not come from God James. The darkness
of your commentary was not born in the light. You are bitter about not being
given the gift of Tongues and now you spend an inordinate amount of time
attacking those who have been so blessed by God.
You are fighting God, not man James, and the sooner you awaken to the
dangers, the better for all associated with you.
We have put your name on our permanent prayer scroll James. That means that
every Sabbath, we lift your name up to God for salvation. I am deeply
troubled about you James.
(1 John 3:6-10) No one who abides in him sins; no one who sins has either
seen him or known him. {7} Little children, let no one deceive you. He who
does right is righteous, as he is righteous. {8} He who commits sin is of
the devil; for the devil has sinned from the beginning. The reason the Son
of God appeared was to destroy the works of the devil. {9} No one born of
God commits sin; for God's nature abides in him, and he cannot sin because
he is born of God. {10} By this it may be seen who are the children of God,
and who are the children of the devil: whoever does not do right is not of
God, nor he who does not love his brother.
(1 John 4:20-21) If any one says, "I love God," and hates his brother, he
is a liar; for he who does not love his brother whom he has seen, cannot
love God whom he has not seen. {21} And this commandment we have from him,
that he who loves God should love his brother also.
Pray James. This is no time to be proud. Humble yourself and seek after God.
You are not in a competition James. What you are, is in spiritual trouble,
yes, great trouble.
--
Peter
One Flock, One Rock
_/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/
He who sits in the heavens laughs; the LORD has them in derision.
(Psalms 2:4)
_/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/
"James Pearce" <ja...@nospamthanks.com> wrote in message
news:98250161...@helium.indigo.net.au...
>
Peter of Canada
Why are you speaking in Old English? Are you trying to sound like a King
James Bible?
Sir, you are no prophet and you have no power to throw anyone to Satan. Just
the idea that you would try is proof enough that you need to repent sir.
I beg you to repent of this foolish pride and humble yourself before God.
The fact that you imitate the false prophet Paul by trying to hand believers
in Jesus over to Satan is totally depraved.
I weep for you sir.
--
Peter
One Flock, One Rock
_/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/
He who sits in the heavens laughs; the LORD has them in derision.
(Psalms 2:4)
_/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/
"Elijah" <eli...@home.com> wrote in message
news:3A8F108B...@home.com...
Peter of Canada
you are speaking about? Why don't you leave the headers intact at least?
--
Peter
One Flock, One Rock
_/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/
He who sits in the heavens laughs; the LORD has them in derision.
(Psalms 2:4)
_/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/
"Kornbelt" <korn...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:7Jfk6.144022$P5.30...@news1.rdc1.il.home.com...
Steven Buehler
You know what, James?
In reviewing this thread, I find a particular response conspicuously
missing.
STEVE WINTER'S.
Is there some particular reason why he does not respond and explain
himself?
Food for thought ...
James Pearce <ja...@nospamthanks.com> wrote:
> 1. Using OneNess theology can you please explain John 14:23 to me?
> 2. Who is the Father of the Lord Jesus? And does the term "Jesus Christ the
> Father", sound scriptural to you?
> 3. Is baptism essential before one can receive the gift of the Holy Ghost?
> If Yes, please explain the situation with Peter Acts 10:44-47
> 4. What does it mean to be baptised "In the name of Jesus Christ"? Will a
> person not baptised "in the name of Jesus Christ" go to heaven? Please
> explain what it means to be saved by the Grace of God.
> 5. What is the name of God, and How do you know this is Gods name?
> 6. What is your definition of a "person". What is the trinitarian
> definition of a "person"? How do they differ? Using your definition would
> you consider the Father, Son & Holy Ghost "persons"? What about using the
> trinitarian definition?
> 7. Please explain how the Word in John 1:1 was God. What is the name of the
> Word?
> 8. Is Jesus Christ the Son of God? Is Jesus Christ, God the Father? Is
> Jesus Christ the Holy Spirit? Does God manifest himself in the Son, The
> Father, and The Holy Spirit, in three distinct and personally loving
> ways/roles? Does this sound like a trinity to you?
> 9. If someone repents, gets baptised in the name of Jesus Christ according
> to Peters instructions in Acts 2:38, but has not yet received the gift of
> tongues, what does this mean? Is this person saved, and what should this
> person do?
> 10. Did God die for you? If Yes, who died, the Son or the Father? Is the
> Son God? If yes, How is the Son God? Is the Son eternal? Is the Father
> eternal? Is the Holy Spirit eternal? Does this sound like a trinity to
> you?
John Fraser
Because Mr. Winter is incapable of giving a responsible answer.
Nick Ashton
label in this discussion, but I can offer a thought on one question:-
Steven Buehler wrote:
> > 9. If someone repents, gets baptised in the name of Jesus Christ according
> > to Peters instructions in Acts 2:38, but has not yet received the gift of
> > tongues, what does this mean? Is this person saved, and what should this
> > person do?
The "gift of tongues" (like gifts of faith, words of wisdom, knowledge,
discernment etc) refers specifically to the meetings use (i.e. *giving*
to the church) of these attributes which all Christians have.
Acts shows that it was known precisely *when* people received the
Spirit,
3 accounts detail what happened when the (invisible) Spitit was
received:-
Acts 2:4, 33; 10:44-46, 19:5-6
If a person has repented (i,e, started sincerely believing in The Lord
as
far as they can understand Him), been baptised but has not spoken in
tongues,
they should take the attitude of persistence (Luke 11:5-13) until they
get
what all got in Acts. (the faith has not changed).
Hasving received this, they should then seek a fellowship that operates
the
gifts as the bible details (1 Cor. 14).
Do you agree Steven ?
- Nick
s.w.b...@sbueher.tampa.ibm.com
>If a person has repented (i,e, started sincerely believing in The Lord
>as
>far as they can understand Him), been baptised but has not spoken in
>tongues,
>they should take the attitude of persistence (Luke 11:5-13) until they
>get
>what all got in Acts. (the faith has not changed).
>
>Hasving received this, they should then seek a fellowship that operates
>the
>gifts as the bible details (1 Cor. 14).
>
>Do you agree Steven ?
Nick,
This is a good statement and I find nothing here to disagree with.
SB
Mike Bugal
news:slrn9dq359.3vse...@sbueher.tampa.ibm.com...
This response is more to what Nick said here than to Steven since I have
never seen the original posting to which Steven is responding. While Steven
sees "nothing here to disagree with" I see one very major point. The
inference above that salvation comes by "believing in the Lord as far as
they can understand Him" gives the idea that just any old "Jesus" will do,
that as long as they name "the Name of Jesus Christ" one can be saved no
matter what the person MEANS by "Jesus Christ". WOW! You talk about "easy
believism"!! One group says that Jesus Christ is a created being who rose
from the dead in a spirit body. Another says that he is a created being who
is the spirit brother of Lucifer. Yet another says that he is a created
being who is a flesh shell given the name of the one who dwells inside him,
and that only the spirit that dwells inside him is REALLY "God". This group
also says that he only existed in eternity as a "thought or idea" in the
mind of God. Then there are those who believe the Word of God, who believe
that Jesus Christ is the eternal Son of God that created the universe and
voluntarily took on human form to fulfill the will of His Father that we
should be redeemed.
The Lord Jesus asked Peter "Who do men say that I am?". That is still the
question that makes the difference between religion and relationship,
between heaven and hell! There is salvation in NONE of the various "Jesus
Christs" listed above except the eternal Son, for none are qualified to
provide a "better sacrifice" than that of bulls and goats for they are
CREATURES and not the Creator. The sacrifice of one more "creation" is in no
way superior to the myriad of sacrifices of "creations" that came in the
5,000 years preceding the cross. More than that, if the Son is not the
eternal Creator but merely a created being then the Father's sacrifice is
made equal to the sacrifice of the various nations around Israel who
sacrificed humans on a regular basis in worship of their gods. More than
even that, if this were true then the Father would be a hypocrite for He
condemned those nations and even used Israel to judge some of them. The
notion that the Son is anything BUT the eternal Creator basically makes the
Father a liar, a hypocrite and, by equivalency, an idol worshipper.
No, there is NO salvation in "another Jesus" who is not the eternal Son of
God, who is not the Creator of the universe or who is himself a created
being. There is NO salvation in "another gospel" (usually a works based
"gospel" too) that brings such a "Jesus". There is no Truth brought by the
"another spirit" which comes to those who receive this "another Jesus" and
"another gospel" (2 Corinthians 11:4), which "spirit" causes people to
believe such things about the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. "Who do
men say that I am?" is still the question one has to answer. There was only
ONE right answer then (Matthew 16:13-19) and there is only ONE right answer
NOW! "As best we understand Him" won't make it... it's Who the Word of God
says that He is that makes the difference between religion and relationship!
In Christ,
Mike Bugal
Heartland Chapel Ministries
http://www.heartlandchapel.org/
"Point out the cults' doctrinal flaws, out come the claws!"
with thanks to Mike S.
Steven Buehler
> This response is more to what Nick said here than to Steven since I
> have never seen the original posting to which Steven is responding.
> While Steven sees "nothing here to disagree with" I see one very major
> point. The inference above that salvation comes by "believing in the
> Lord as far as they can understand Him" gives the idea that just any
> old "Jesus" will do, that as long as they name "the Name of Jesus
> Christ" one can be saved no matter what the person MEANS by "Jesus
> Christ". WOW! You talk about "easy believism"!!
Mike,
You make a good point here; that statement "as far as they can
understand Him" is subject to multiple meanings and I didn't read into it
what you apparently did (you read it differently than I did).
Clearly we're talking about the Jesus Christ of the Bible (I
hope).
SB
k
Nick Ashton
>
> Mike,
>
> You make a good point here; that statement "as far as they can
> understand Him" is subject to multiple meanings and I didn't read into it
> what you apparently did (you read it differently than I did).
>
> Clearly we're talking about the Jesus Christ of the Bible (I
> hope).
>
> SB
> k
What about the guty in the chipshop claiming to be The One ?